Leishmaniasis is a neglected tropical disease affecting humans and domesticated animals with high mortality in endemic countries. The pleiotropy of symptoms and the complicated gold-standard methods make the need for non-invasive, highly sensitive diagnostic tests imperative. Individual studies on molecular-based Leishmania diagnosis in urine show high discrepancy; thus, a data-evidenced comparison of various techniques is necessary. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis using the bivariate method of diagnostic methods to pool sensitivities and specificities. We investigated the impact of DNA-extraction method, PCR type, amplified locus, host species, leishmaniasis form, and geographical region. The pooled sensitivity was 69.2%. Tests performed with the kit-based DNA extraction method and qPCR outweighed in sensitivity the phenol-chloroform-based and PCR methods, while their combination showed a sensitivity of 79.3%. Amplified locus, human or canine as host and cutaneous or visceral leishmaniasis revealed similar sensitivities. Tests in European and Middle Eastern countries performed better than tests in other regions (sensitivity 81.7% vs. 43.7%). A combination of kit-based DNA extraction and qPCR could be a safer choice for molecular diagnosis for Leishmania infection in urine samples in European–Middle Eastern countries. For the rest of the world, more studies are needed to better characterize the endemic parasite species.